<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2019 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'Just a personal mod',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_4.0/y.st./weblog/2019/05/25.jpg" alt="A rainy day" class="framed-centred-image" width="800" height="480"/>
<section id="diet">
	<h2>Dietary intake</h2>
	<p>
		For breakfast, I had 132 grams of cereal and 329 grams of soy milk.
		For dinner, I had 390 grams of muffuletta.
		I also snacked on 289 grams of pretzels
	</p>
</section>
<section id="drudgery">
	<h2>Drudgery</h2>
	<p>
		My discussion post for the day:
	</p>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			You make a great point about unavailable sources not interfering with maintenance.
			It also gets me thinking about other maintenance issues.
			For example, you probably don&apos;t want to try backing up your database while it&apos;s in the middle of being hit by queries.
			With materialised view with deferred updates, you can have your materialise views simply not update while you back up the main database, so the main database doesn&apos;t get hit with any queries while you back it up.
			At least, your main database can avoid retrieval queries that way.
			You&apos;ll have to postpone update queries in the mean time or something, but you won&apos;t have a period of time in which you can&apos;t retrieve semi-accurate information.
		</p>
		<p>
			In the advantages of materialised views, you make the claim that materialised views don&apos;t require extra space or extra storage though.
			And then in the disadvantages, you claim that they <strong>*do*</strong> require extra space.
			Which is it?
			It can&apos;t be both.
			You also claim that maintenance operations both are and are not separate from OLTP.
			Again, it can&apos;t be both.
		</p>
	</blockquote>
</section>
<section id="Minetest">
	<h2>Minetest</h2>
	<p>
		I&apos;ve decided that I think I want to keep my <code>elemental</code> mod, the new mod I&apos;ve been planning in place of <code>minequest</code>, more on the down-low than originally planned.
		<code>elemental</code> will just be my server-specific mod that give meaning to <code>minestats</code> in my world.
		It was definitely the right decision to take <code>minestats</code> itself public, but there&apos;s no need for me to try to push <code>minestats</code>&apos; greatness to people that aren&apos;t really interested anyway.
		By keeping it somewhat private, I can do what I like with it and not worry about how it&apos;ll come across to others.
		I don&apos;t have to avoid doing certain things or be sure to do others.
		It&apos;ll just be what makes my world be what I want it to be.
	</p>
	<p>
		That&apos;s not to say the code will never be available though.
		If one of my players takes interest, I&apos;ll release the code online.
		Likewise, if one of my players tries to get me to add something to the world, I&apos;ll release the code and tell them to make a pull request to get it integrated with <code>elemental</code> or integrated with Minetest Game.
		I&apos;m not doing a bunch of unrelated mods, which some players would probably ask for eventually.
		The entire theme of this world will be the <code>elemental</code> mod, and anything unrelated will only make it into the world if it&apos;s a part of the base game <code>elemental</code> is designed to sit on top of.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="religion">
	<h2>Religion</h2>
	<p>
		My downstairs neighbour was asking about the missionaries tonight.
		Apparently, they asked the neighbour if I was home at some point.
		I&apos;m guessing that was Thursday night, when they showed up unannounced.
		My neighbour wanted to know what they were here for, so I explained that they were trying to convert me.
		They asked from what to what, so I said from atheist to Mormon.
		The neighbour said I shouldn&apos;t be either one, but to definitely not be a Mormon.
		They then went into explaining how religion is very simple.
		You just have to accept that Jesus dies on the cross for you, and you&apos;re fine.
		Heh.
		I didn&apos;t say anything, but that&apos;s a pretty though pill to swallow.
		First of all, there&apos;s no proof Jesus was even real, and I think current consensus is that Jesus was a character created from an amalgam of actual historical people and fictitious people from ancient stories.
		Second, if you look at the history of religion, you see that all of the ones with gods make no sense, because the god or gods revealed themselves only to some small population instead of the world, and many times, the gods change their defining characteristics as the culture and experiences of the people change.
		For example, Yahweh wasn&apos;t omnipotent or omniscient until after the Jewish were enslaved by the Zoroastrians, who had an all-powerful, all-knowing god.
		The Jewish then copied those characteristics into their own god, Yahweh.
		And third, the thing with Jesus is that his father is a wrathful god that&apos;s unable to forgive your slightest mistakes without a perfect human sacrifice, and Jesus was that sacrifice.
		What kind of god worth worshipping can&apos;t forgive without a human sacrifice?
		And if we&apos;re so undeserving of forgiveness, how does a human sacrifice make anything better?
		If we deserve forgiveness, we deserve it with or without someone else taking on our punishment.
		And if we don&apos;t deserve forgiveness, we don&apos;t deserve if even if someone else takes on our punishment.
		And then there&apos;s the whole you&apos;ve-got-to-believe thing.
		It&apos;s not about how good of a person you are or not, it&apos;s whether you are able to believe outrageous claims made millennia ago without any evidence whatsoever, and even quite a bit of evidence that the book that tells you this is otherwise full of lies.
		We have proof that the bible is incredibly unreliable.
		Why would we believe this one claim it makes?
		Why does <strong>*anyone*</strong> believe this garbage?
		Of course I&apos;m an atheist, just as I should be.
	</p>
</section>
END
);
